SB2398 would amend the Illinois Sports Wagering Act to place limits on how licensed sports wagering operators may use artificial intelligence. Specifically, the bill would prohibit a sports wagering licensee from using AI to track an individual’s sports wagers, to generate offers or promotions targeted to a specific individual, or to create a gambling product. The measure adds a new section to the Act and is framed as a gaming regulation bill focused on the use of emerging technology in betting operations.
In practical terms, the bill would create a new compliance restriction for sports betting licensees in Illinois and would affect operators that use data-driven marketing, personalization tools, or AI-assisted product development. It would not ban sports wagering or AI generally, but would limit certain AI applications within the regulated sports betting industry. The bill would likely require licensees to review their customer tracking, promotional targeting, and product design practices to ensure they do not rely on prohibited AI functions.
Impact
The bill would amend the Sports Wagering Act by adding a new statutory prohibition on AI use by sports wagering licensees. It would affect licensed sportsbooks and any vendors or platforms acting on their behalf by restricting AI-based individualized tracking, personalized promotions, and AI-generated gambling products. The change would add a new layer of regulatory compliance to Illinois gaming law and could influence how operators collect and use customer data, market to bettors, and develop betting products.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee debate or votes, the measure appears to be a precautionary consumer-protection and gaming-regulation proposal rather than a controversial expansion of gambling policy. Its framing suggests concern about the use of AI in betting environments, especially around personalization and behavioral tracking. Because there is no available transcript or voting history, no clear bipartisan support or opposition can be inferred from the record provided.
Contention
The main potential point of contention is whether the bill’s AI restrictions are too broad or too vague for sports wagering operators, particularly around what counts as using AI to “track” wagers, “target” a specific individual, or “create” a gambling product. Operators and technology vendors may view the limits as burdensome or difficult to implement, while supporters would likely argue they are necessary to prevent intrusive surveillance, manipulative marketing, and AI-driven gambling harms. No specific stakeholder positions are provided in the available materials.